Yep, I've addressed the MD stuff in the latest revision - see attached diffs.
The reference to 'mountroot' in next68k/stnd/boot/en.c is a false-positive;
that one actually refers to a locally-defined function! All the other MD
references to mountroot relate to NFS-booting on some hp* platforms.

TEST1 and TEST2 boot successfully to single user, and I'm able to do a
'ls' command from the single-user shell prompt. However, both of these
panic due to the "end <= VM_MAX_KERNEL_ADDRESS" thing mentioned in an
earlier thread.

I will fix that soon.

Looking forward to it! :)

KNF says 'strcmp(a, b) == 0'

Well, hopefully you meant 'strcmp(a,b) != 0' ?? I have fixed this.

+ static char my_vfs_name[NAME_MAX + 1];

Should be MNAMELEN from mount.h, I think.

Fixed in current diffs.

Can you make 'rootfstype' in ioconf.c (or wherever it is emitted) into an
array sized MNAMELEN and not a pointer? That way, we can get rid of
'mountroot' completely and always key on the name. So the code in
vfs_mountroot() would look like:

As previously mentioned,
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008, Paul Goyette wrote:

It's emitted in config's mkswap.c, and defined in sys/systm.h.
I've already completely removed the mountroot variable; everything
already keys only on the name. The only benefit of allocating the new
rootfstype as a fixed array is to avoid having the local 'my_vfs_name'
above.
But, if I define it as an array in swapnetbsd.c, it would also need to
be defined that way is sys/sys/systm.h, and then either systm.h would
need to #include mount.h, or all of its users would need to do that.
So, which is more desirable?
1. #include <mount.h> in systm.h?
2. #include <mount.h> in all users of systm.h?
3. Have my_vfs_name statically allocated in kern_subr.c, retain
rootfstype as a simple pointer, and make rootfstype point to
it if needed?

I added an additional test-case (with 'config ... type tmp') to test out the
RB_ASKNAME path, and found an additional bug in my code. It has been
addressed in the attached diffs.

Any additional comments/reviews/critiques greatly appreciated, as well as any
test reports. I'd be especially interested in test reports from anyone using
hpcmips, hpcsh, hp300, and hpcarm since these are the ones that had some MD
references to mountroot.